From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
cc: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>,
	PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Considering Gerrit for CFs
In-reply-to: <511513E5.10104@gmx.net>
References: <5112C602.3090109@agliodbs.com> <511513E5.10104@gmx.net>
Comments: In-reply-to Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
	message dated "Fri, 08 Feb 2013 10:04:05 -0500"
Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2013 10:58:27 -0500
Message-ID: <16562.1360339107@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> I suggest, build it and they will come, or not.  Let people push their
> patches into Gerrit and attach the reviews to the commit fest items.  If
> reviewers then want to use that, it's their choice.  We'll see how it goes.

I might be misunderstanding what you're suggesting here, but it sounds
like this would imply that reviews could end up off in a Gerrit repo
somewhere, never getting posted to the mailing lists at all.  That would
make me sad.  The list archives are this project's community memory,
and I have every expectation that they'll still be around and useful
when Gerrit is forgotten.  I don't object to people using their
tools-of-choice to perform reviewing, but we need some way of making
sure that the reviews get archived.

			regards, tom lane


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers